Baseball Hall Of Fame reduces eligibility period to 10 years

[Dick_Pole]

Ugh. All this added explanation about Raines not being in yet!!!

 

Raines:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/raineti01.shtml

 

Lofton:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/loftoke01.shtml

 

Tell me, what exactly has Raines done that Lofton hasn't done? Raines had 69.1 WAR in 10.3K PA, Lofton had 68.2 WAR in 9.2K PA. At least we are in the position to talk about Raines and how he isn't in the HOF due to drug use, or due to playing in Canada because some people still vote for him. Lofton got knocked off the first time he was on the ballot and has been long out of the discussion. So what's his excuse? Perfectly valid to talk about Raines not being in, but if you're going to do that, you also have to mention Lofton in the same breath and apply reasons that could be applicable to the both of them (small markets, lead off men get no respect, defense and walks are underrated etc). But this is not a Montreal thing or a cocaine thing imo.

[GD]

^I'd use fangraphs' WAR if I were you.

[Dick_Pole]

^I'd use fangraphs' WAR if I were you.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1406&position=OF

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=246&position=OF

 

66.4 versus 62.1

 

Earth shattering difference dude....

[Dick_Pole]

While I'm in ranting mode:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/wellsda01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morrija02.shtml

 

Wells:

3439 IP

239 wins

108 ERA+

58.1 WAR from fangraphs (to keep GD happy)

 

Morris:

3824 IP

254 wins

105 ERA+

52.5 WAR

 

Not only that, but Wells has the more deserved hype as a big game pitcher with the playoff stats to back it up and a Yankee hero. Same surly attitude as Morris. But Wells drops off first ballot and Morris hung around until the end.

 

The only thing I can explain it is old school dinosaur bias against more recent players. That and stereotyping Raines = Lofton = Coleman = Pierre = not Hall worthy.

[John_Havok]

Would I have voted for Ty Cobb to get into the Hall? No: but he was living in a time when racism was tolerated so I can see why he got in. Was there any suggestion that Mays, Mantle, or Aaron were *******s at the time they were admitted? Not as far I know. Personally, I don't think revoking someone's membership in the Hall should be considered. But, keeping out steroid users I have no problem with.

 

I think it is interesting that so many are linking the rule changes to a "keep the steroid users out of the hall" agenda. If that were truly their desire the Board of Directors could have simply amended the rules to disallow them completely without any say from MLB or anyone else for that matter. It seems silly to think that amending from 15 to 10 would keep some of the best players ever (on paper) out of the Hall. If they were destined to be in, they would have been voted on the first ballot.

 

Who mentioned racism about Ty Cobb? Sure he was a raging bigot, but I'm talking about him intentionally trying to hurt other players on the field, spiking every guy he could where he slid into a base. The fact that he hated anyone who wasn't white is just further proof.

 

Why are you holding Bonds to a different standard than those who are already in the Hall?

[closetjaysfan]

^I'd use fangraphs' WAR if I were you.

 

rWAR has Loften (65.1) above Raines, Ozzie Smith, Alomar, McGuire, and Jackie Robinson to name a few. So maybe its the problem of the Sabermetric voters splitting their attention amongst the various formulas... or maybe its that the majority of voters still rely on traditional stats (ie: Cabrera vs. Trout). I think Loften's biggest problem is that the 2013 class had so many big name first time candidates: Clemens, Bonds, Biggio, Shilling, Piazza, Sosa, Franco, Alomar. And lets not forget some big names still on there from years past.

 

Interestingly, Loften himself blames steroids for not making the hall (also compares himself to Tim Raines): http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2013/02/kenny_lofton_says_playing_in_t.html

[closetjaysfan]

Who mentioned racism about Ty Cobb? Sure he was a raging bigot, but I'm talking about him intentionally trying to hurt other players on the field, spiking every guy he could where he slid into a base. The fact that he hated anyone who wasn't white is just further proof.

 

Why are you holding Bonds to a different standard than those who are already in the Hall?

 

Im not holding them to a different standard. Im saying I don't think its right to take someone's plaque away with hindsight as your guide. If I were voting with Hank Aaron or whomever on the ballot and knew he was cheating then I wouldnt vote for them.

[John_Havok]

Im not holding them to a different standard. Im saying I don't think its right to take someone's plaque away with hindsight as your guide. If I were voting with Hank Aaron or whomever on the ballot and knew he was cheating then I wouldnt vote for them.

 

It's not hindsight. The writers then all knew guys cheated, the only difference is that writers kept quiet because they knew if they wrote anything bad about players, they'd have no job. Back then, writers covered one team, and it was all newspapers. The only difference is that now, the fans know as well and now the writers can climb on their high holy horse and admonish the new generations cheaters while pretending their own generation wasn't just as dirty. Now, with the internet, mass national media, social media, now they don't have to worry about biting the hand that feeds them.

 

It's a ridiculous double standard.

 

And yes, IMO, it is wrong to hold someone out now for cheating, when you already have cheaters in. If you really think the Hall of fame should be cheater free, you should be actively against all cheaters in the hall, not just the new ones.

 

It's all ego. The old time HOF members think they have to continue to support the ******** pretence that their generation was clean, because if they didnt they'd have to admit that they're the same as Bonds. And they dont want to do that because of all the negativity around him, so they go public with all their " I'll boycott the hall of fame ceremony if Bonds is inducted" trash to protect themselves and their fake legacy.

 

It's hypocrisy at it's finest. If any of those old codgers had an ounce of integrity, they would come out and admit publicly that the hall of fame is already full of cheats, and it needs to be cleaned up.

 

Fat chance of that happening.

Edited July 28, 2014 by John_Havok

[closetjaysfan]

While I'm in ranting mode:

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/wellsda01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/morrija02.shtml

 

Wells:

3439 IP

239 wins

108 ERA+

58.1 WAR from fangraphs (to keep GD happy)

 

Morris:

3824 IP

254 wins

105 ERA+

52.5 WAR

 

Not only that, but Wells has the more deserved hype as a big game pitcher with the playoff stats to back it up and a Yankee hero. Same surly attitude as Morris. But Wells drops off first ballot and Morris hung around until the end.

 

The only thing I can explain it is old school dinosaur bias against more recent players. That and stereotyping Raines = Lofton = Coleman = Pierre = not Hall worthy.

 

It is possible that Morris is simply being remembered for his pitching performance in game 7 in the 1991 world series whereas Wells is simply being remembered as a boozer. It certainly is rant worthy...

[KingKat]

rWAR has Loften (65.1) above Raines, Ozzie Smith, Alomar, McGuire, and Jackie Robinson to name a few. So maybe its the problem of the Sabermetric voters splitting their attention amongst the various formulas... or maybe its that the majority of voters still rely on traditional stats (ie: Cabrera vs. Trout). I think Loften's biggest problem is that the 2013 class had so many big name first time candidates: Clemens, Bonds, Biggio, Shilling, Piazza, Sosa, Franco, Alomar. And lets not forget some big names still on there from years past.

 

Interestingly, Loften himself blames steroids for not making the hall (also compares himself to Tim Raines): http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2013/02/kenny_lofton_says_playing_in_t.html

 

LoftOn was highly disliked by the media. If he was a player they like as a person, like Dale Murphy, he would have at least stayed on the ballot and maybe built some steam over time.

[Dick_Pole]

LoftOn was highly disliked by the media. If he was a player they like as a person, like Dale Murphy, he would have at least stayed on the ballot and maybe built some steam over time.

 

Might have had an impact, however Jack Morris and Eddie Murray were also disliked and fared much better than Lofton.

[Dick_Pole]

I think Loften's biggest problem is that the 2013 class had so many big name first time candidates: Clemens, Bonds, Biggio, Shilling, Piazza, Sosa, Franco, Alomar. And lets not forget some big names still on there from years past. http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2013/02/kenny_lofton_says_playing_in_t.html

 

That's probably his biggest issue. An interesting theory behind that is the timing of expansion. After the 60's expansion from 16 to 24 teams, from 1969 to 1992 only two teams were added while the pool of talented players expanded into Latin America. So a relative lack of standout players from the 80's was due to the talent pool catching up to the amount of MLB roster spaces available making it harder for players to stand out.

 

Then in 6 seasons the number of teams expanded to 30. So in the 90's and early 2000's there were 100 extra roster spots that wouldn't go to players before 1992. So a bunch of very good players got to pad their stats against the bottom 100 and become great players.

 

Now that there hasn't been any expansion for 16 seasons, and none in the near term plans, I wonder if we're reverting back to a time where it becomes harder for players to stand out above their peers. There's been a lot of factors to consider that makes such an assumption difficult, but I would it just plain awesome if someone did a study that proves that s***** pitching from expanded 1998 rosters had a bigger impact on home run totals than steroids.